National Strike Force Day Of Action In Manchester

Written by Cigpapers

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

National Strike Force launched themselves on to the Manchester political scene on 28th January 2015 with a day of action across Manchester.


National Strike Force distributed 60 Greggs hot drinks vouchers to 12 homeless people in Manchester – 5 each.

National Strike Force activists started the day by giving twelve homeless people five vouchers each for a hot drink at Greggs the Bakers. All of the twelve homeless people approached were White British males. National Strike Force’s core beliefs are compassion for others and they have a policy of starting all political activity with acts of charity to indigenous British people.


National Strike Force activists saw this sticker on their way to Prestwich in North Manchester. Even though NSF were doing the same stickers they were obtaining property owner’s permission before posting them.

National Strike Force activists then headed up to Prestwich in North Manchester stickering on the way, after obtaining the property owner’s permission at all times.


National Strike Force activists distributed the NSF’s message of hope to hundreds of Prestwich residents via door to door leafleting.

NSF activists were soon swarming through Prestwich delivering hundreds of leaflets to domestic properties. A few householders offered their moral support and a £20 cash donation was obtained from an enthusiastic member of the Public.


The jewish Labour MP for Prestwich, Ivan Lewis, didn’t want an anti-Globalisation flash demo outside his constituency offices. But he got one anyway.

As National Strike Force activists swarmed through Prestwich a simultaneous flash demo was held outside jewish MP Ivan Lewis’s Office. Passing motorists beeped their horns and made enthusiastic hand gestures.

The day was ended off with a traditional pint of Hobgoblin in a local pub run by a welcoming Nationalist landlord.

Immigration Is Destruction


By Boadicea (1)

Not happening!

Not happening!

We were sold mass immigration as a fabulous celebration: a ‘celebration of diversity’; a ‘rainbow utopia’; etc. It was all about peace, happiness, enrichment, harmony and love. They never mentioned destruction and harm. However, it will be shown that, contrary to the images, this political policy has in fact caused much destruction – and mass immigration is, in many ways, inherently destructive(2). They deceived and manipulated, sometimes they plain lied.


So in what ways can mass immigration be viewed as causing destruction?


In the most significant and fundamental manner, immigration is destruction in the sense that if there is no form of separation between groups, then over time the immigrants will mix with the indigenous people and form one racial group. The mixing actually acts, in the long term, against diversity – this, in fact, leads to homogenisation. In this sense, to sell mass immigration as diversity is not true (in the longer term), and actually it is the opposite (the ‘multiculturalism’ propaganda is inversionist). Some figures in the media, politics, academia, etc. boast of the destruction of indigenous Brits, heralding the day when there will be no more such people and ‘everyone will be coffee-coloured’ or ‘we will all be one race’, etc. Cessation of existence is the destruction of the racial or ethnic group in question(3). In this sense immigration is destruction(4).


Mass immigration also causes destruction of culture. It is a logical fact that when more than one culture is present in one place at one time, then it is not possible for all cultures to exist totally intact: there inevitably has to be a level(5) of destruction of one or more, if not all(6) of the cultures in question.


The inevitable destruction of culture as a consequence of immigration is enunciated by Dr Turner’s ‘one set of rules dilemma’(7) which states that at one place at one time only one set of ‘rules’ can describe the culture of the population in that area (country, city, etc.). All cultures can be described by what could be conceptualised as sets of descriptive ‘rules’, for example the descriptive ‘rules’ describing the architecture, mode of dress, language, behaviour, etc. An example of one such descriptive ‘rule’ could be that ‘women all wear purple hats’. In cases in which there is a difference (s) between such sets, then not all sets can describe one area simultaneously. And no two different cultures share the same set of such ‘rules’ (or they would not be different cultures). Hence, if one group moves into the area in which another group is practising its culture, then the ‘rules’ of both groups cannot remain unchanged across the area/population in question.
As a simple hypothetical example to illustrate the ‘one set of rules dilemma’, perhaps cultural group P paints all their buildings pink, and cultural group B paints them blue.img636


If group P moves to the city of group B, then the city-scape cannot remain all blue unless group P gives up their cultural practice of using pink paint. If group P continues to use pink paint, then the city-scape is altered: now there is a mixture of pink and blue buildings instead of the blue view that represented group B’s culture.

Alternatively, amongst other options, group B could change their practice – which would present cultural destruction for group B. Either: group P changes; or group B changes; or both change; or neither change; or parts of groups P and/or B change and other parts do not change (and the relevant changes in all cases could be to any colour or mixture of colours, not necessarily just pink or blue). The only option that does not involve either group changing their paint colour still does not preserve culture: even if neither group change their paint, the indigenous culture has been changed(8) (see above). In any possible scenario there is alteration of one, if not both(9), of the cultures in question. Culture has not been preserved. This destruction is inevitable in such circumstances.

This alteration of culture as a result of immigration can be seen in real life examples, e.g. views of cities have changed as the indigenous culture of Britain has been destroyed to make way for minarets and temples, etc.


The descriptive ‘rules’ can be applied to any aspect of culture, including to the rules of governance, for example: may women drive on the roads? They cannot drive and also not be allowed to drive. All cultures cannot remain intact: destruction is inevitable if space is shared(10). This is a logical fact. In real life some recommend that indigenous people alter their behaviour to accommodate immigrants, e.g. in Scandinavia one professor recommends that women alter their behaviour to avoid being raped by immigrants(11).
“Norwegian women must realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”


Of course, when indigenous British culture is actively inhibited so as ‘not to offend’ or otherwise, (e.g. no pork, Christmas celebrations reduced or banned, etc.(12)), then this represents another example of the ‘one set of rules dilemma’ in practice. In fact, the very presence of different people is an alteration to indigenous culture. People form a part of the culture, and also culture is the product of people. In shared space, not all cultures can remain fully intact. Hence, mass immigration presents destruction of culture(13).

There are many other ways in which there is destruction. Mass immigration causes destruction of feelings of fraternity/solidarity, trust(14), peace, familiarity, etc. It goes against natural instincts to have one’s territory invaded, and this provokes feelings of stress(15) and discomfort. Many indigenous people are upset and their quality of life suffers varying levels of destruction in this manner(16) – but the deterioration in the quality of indigenous people’s lives appears less important than the desires of some immigrants who ‘want to improve their lives’(17). Some lives are ‘more equal’ than others. Of course, it is not just feelings of destruction of peace and suchlike that are brought by diversity, but there frequently are actual outbreaks of disorder etc., these on small and sometimes large scales, (e.g. racial animosity/enviousness/resentment in face-to-face encounters, race riots, etc.). Diversity of race/ethnicity etc. brings strife in many forms. Quality of life suffers destruction as a result of immigration.


In Britain, and other countries too, there have been many reductions in freedom as a result of mass immigration(18). Some hold that the diversity of immigration requires reductions in freedoms – and even requires a totalitarian government(19). The former German chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, is quoted as saying that ‘multicultural’ countries can only work under an authoritarian government:
“The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a democratic society”(20).
Of course, with the competition for cultural (and other) dominance between groups, clashes of cultures and races, etc. such a situation is intrinsically unstable and conflict-prone(21). Reductions in freedom frequently are held as necessary to inhibit unrest and open conflict(22), for example curfews are sometimes implemented and surveillance is widespread, etc.(23) Numerous other problems are caused by the diversity of immigration, many of which the governments of such countries attempt to quell/prevent by reducing freedoms. For example, often we are told that because certain immigrant groups present a security threat, our freedoms and privacies are to be reduced to keep us safe. Freedoms also are reduced in the UK as the government attempts to inhibit any opposition to mass immigration, and, inter alia, tries to suppress the indigenous people from expressing (or even thinking) anything that might upset the illusion that immigration is great. Freedom of speech has been severely curtailed in this country as a result of immigration (and the related actions by the government)(24). In many cases one is not allowed to state certain truths in case it might pose a threat to the political policy of mass immigration and to the related happy rainbow images (and/or upset immigrants, etc.) – truth and knowledge have hence suffered destruction. Of course, the ideology of ‘multiculturalism’ is based on utopian fantasies, irrationalities and lies (see Dr Turner qv). For such ideologies: truth, reason and open debate pose a significant threat. The whole house of cards easily could collapse were people to be well-informed with true facts – and were allowed to think and debate facts and policies in a fearless, honest and rational manner. Such ideologies require the suppression of truth, reason and morality to survive.
“Dissent has been relabelled as either hatred or insanity. Those who disagree with current orthodoxies are therefore deemed to be either bad or mad […] utopian fantasies wrenched facts and evidence to fit their governing idea. Independent thought thus became impossible — which inevitably resulted in an attack upon freedom, because reason and liberty are inseparable bed- fellows. […] Reason was thus replaced by bullying, intimidation and the suppression of debate.”(25)

Even the use of some words, of certain kinds, can result in one being arrested and sent to prison(26). It never used to be like this. Chief Constable Fahy warns of Britain becoming a police state: “There is a danger of us being turned into a thought police”(27) . Many freedoms have been reduced as a result of immigration; this presents the reality of destruction of our liberties.


Justice and fairness have suffered significant destruction as a result of immigration. Because of immigration, albeit perhaps indirectly, the principle of double jeopardy was removed in Britain. In a general sense it is more difficult for certain types of fairness to exist in a mixed country. This is illustrated by examples such as observing the opinions of different races (on average) on cases that pertain to race – such as in relation to the O.J. Simpson trial in which blacks and whites differed (in general) in opinion as to whether O.J. was guilty or not. Such divergences of opinion make jury trials and other matters of justice problematic in mixed countries. The same issue can be seen in relation to the demands that different groups want their own group to police them, judge them, etc. – these demands often made on the basis that other groups will not, amongst other things, treat them fairly(28). The police frequently have been accused of not policing properly because the criminals in question were immigrants – this accusation made for various reasons including that the police do not want to be labelled ‘racist’(29). If the police are not performing their job properly in relation to immigrants, then this is not just nor fair and also this tends to decrease the quality of life for the people of the country. It is also held that often immigrants receive more favourable treatment when they are victims of crime (relative to indigenous victims)(30). Such accusations of differential treatment pertain to the various other arms of the legal system, not only to the police (e.g. CPS, judges, lawyers, etc.). In these contexts, and others, immigration destroys fairness and justice(31). Reduction of trust in the legal system has various destructive consequences, as does the destruction of the belief that the country is reasonably fair: these destructions of justice and fairness cause further destructions.

These problems of inequality before the law touch upon the idea that in many senses of the term ‘equality’, immigration’s diversity is incompatible with ‘equality’(32). Of course, in a social and political sense ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word (see Dr Turner, qv). However, one can distinguish certain forms of ‘equality’ that are not problematic from a rational perspective. For example, above various issues in relation to equality before the law were noted. Immigration also presents inequalities in relation to equality of opportunity and result: for equal results one would have to have unequal processing if the groups differ on the relevant criterion (or criteria). Hence, ‘equality’ in both of these senses is not possible in such circumstances(33). The very act of immigration into the country of an indigenous people presents the fact of treating the indigenous people as not equal to the immigrants(34). It is a reality that different groups tend (in general/overall) to feel more fraternity and loyalty towards members of their own group, presenting various intrinsic inequalities in a mixed country (including in relation to the law – see above). Thus, in many senses of the term ‘equality’, ‘equality’ is reduced, if not impossible, when there is immigration. In an ironic manner, immigration is frequently sold as ‘equality’.

Many children’s lives have suffered destruction as a result of immigration into Britain – this harm would not necessarily always be a result of immigration (as opposed to some of the destruction noted above which is intrinsic to immigration in general), but has been resultant in this context. This particular harm and destruction has been caused in many ways(35), including the many thousands raped by immigrants(36). It is held by many that the little girls in places such as Rotherham (and Sheffield, Manchester, etc.) were sacrificed to appease the immigrants and/or to enable the authorities to indulge themselves in their feel-good ‘anti-racism’ and ‘multiculturalism’ dogmas – letting them feel superior and compassionate(37) – and, not unrelatedly, avoid accusations of ‘racism’(38). It is likely that some people were too scared to act properly. Some hold that the abuse needed to be ignored to maintain the lie that immigration was not destruction, but was good(39):

“What is particularly sickening is their desperation to cover up the abuse in their attempt to maintain the illusion that cultural diversity was working in Rotherham.” (40)

As the local Labour MP for Rotherham during the time documented in Professor Jay’s Report (MP between 1994-2012), Denis MacShane (former BBC employee and convicted fraudster) stated:

“there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat, if I may put it like that. Perhaps, yes, as a true Guardian reader and liberal Leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.” (41)

As author Allison Pearson notes in response, qv: “Much better to hang on to your impeccable liberal credentials than save a few girls from being raped, eh, Denis?”(42)


The destruction that results from sexual abuse is particularly life-destroying and the consequences rarely are confined to the victim him or herself; frequently the destruction to the spirit is passed down the generations and also family and others in proximity are affected. For example, the consequences of victims’ mental illnesses (and pain/suffering in general) affect others, as do the many cases when such victims turn to drink and drugs to dull the pain, cope with life, etc. Of course, a lot of the drug trade is conducted by immigrants, only too happy to profit from the destruction of lives.

Crimes inflicted upon indigenous Brits by immigrants are not confined to rape and drugs, and this level of crime has caused pain, destruction of a sense of safety and security – and the resultant decreases in quality of life. For example, many elderly people are scared to go out to the extent that they would like, and largely this is due to the fear of crime (and the destruction of their way of life and comfort in general, etc.). The increase in crime as result of immigration(43) (both by direct and indirect means(44)) causes fear and discomfort, plus other problems such as increased security precautions being necessary, increased insurance premiums being paid, etc. Immigration has destroyed quality of life to a significant extent.

Picture 9

The validity and integrity of the electoral system in Britain has suffered a level of destruction as a result of immigration. This has occurred by various means. For example, the problem of postal voting fraud is found to be occurring disproportionately amongst certain immigrant groups (not to mention the deals for the genuine postal votes and orders to vote from elders and family leaders, etc.)(45). There are attitudes to the voting system amongst some immigrant groups that differ from those of the Brits, and there is a higher level of corruption amongst some immigrant groups than amongst the indigenous people(46). As Attorney General MP Dominic Grieve says:
“we have minority communities in this country which come from backgrounds where corruption is endemic”(47)

Of course, such corruption and attitudes are specific to certain immigrant groups, and this form of destruction is not a necessary consequence of immigration in the general sense. However, the diversity that immigration always brings does present some inherent potential problems in relation to elections, including matters such as split loyalties and groups favouring their own(48). All these general and specific issues present ways in which immigration has presented some destruction of political democracy.

Immigration has brought a lot of destruction to the working and lower-middle classes. In many ways, immigration is a class issue. The propagation of ‘moral relativism’(49) caused a belief to be widely held that one ‘should not judge’ – hence, amongst other things, facilitating immigration. This relativism has resulted in an inhibition of the teaching of moral and correct behaviour, which has wrought havoc on poorer communities. In more direct ways, immigration has destroyed the quality of life for working class people as wages and working conditions have reduced, and the shortage of lower-skilled and no-skilled jobs has rendered many unemployed(50). The main influx of immigrants has tended to be in the poorer areas of the country, and these areas are also less able to cope with extra problems and destruction. It is hence the less advantaged that have suffered the most – this pertains to all the destructions noted above, e.g. it is disproportionately white working class children who have been raped and abused by immigrants and it is largely these communities that have been destroyed by the other crimes and by the shattering of any sense of solidarity, comfort and community. As Leo McKinstry notes:
“Mass immigration has amounted to a gross betrayal of the British people, particularly the working class who have borne the brunt of this catastrophically misguided policy.”(51)

One BBC presenter claims that the BBC ignored the problem of immigration so as not to be branded ‘racist’, and also because:
“BBC employees are unable to understand the concerns of ordinary people because they typically have ‘sheltered’ middle-class lives…”

In some ways, immigration has been foisted upon the white working class by the more privileged of society, and objections to immigration are sneered at in a snobbish manner by the more privileged – while the poorer are destroyed. Many of the educated/privileged seem to feel it is intellectually, socially and morally superior to support this destruction. This is admitted by some who previously supported mass immigration, e.g. Peter Hitchens writes that he is sorry:
“…we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people – usually in the poorest parts of Britain – who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly ‘vibrant communities’. If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.
Revolutionary students didn’t come from such ‘vibrant’ areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London). We might live in ‘vibrant’ places for a few (usually squalid) years […] we sneered at [the urban poor] as ‘racists’. …
I have learned since what a spiteful, self-righteous, snobbish and arrogant person I was (and most of my revolutionary comrades were, too).”(52)

There are other ways in which immigration presents destruction, both in the general sense and in the specific example of Great Britain recently, including, in this country: destruction of the education system(53); the advancement of the country being reduced; etc.(54). However the destruction of culture and existence are perhaps the most serious (and are two of the inherent forms of destruction caused by immigration(55)). So, in exchange for this what do we get? And is it worth it? Could anything be worth genocide?

Well, we are told that mass immigration brings diversity, but in the long term it does not; as noted above it brings quite the opposite. And diversity in shared space is not always a good thing either, (e.g. race riots, fracturing of peace and solidarity, etc.). Some people say they enjoy seeing different faces around – putting aside the patronising ‘zoo-like’ tone of this – the very diversity they enjoy is threatened by mass immigration, and is their small pleasure worth the destruction? How could they think it is acceptable to self-indulge at the expense of others – and, ironically, all the time posing with their ‘moral values’? Why do ‘anti-racists’ throw one race under the bus to posture? And do they not see any possible inconsistency in their position? Another ‘argument’ for mass immigration is the variety of restaurants available, but is this choice of restaurants worth the destruction? And, of course, indigenous people can be taught to cook any dishes(56).


Some argue that it is ‘nice’ and compassionate to bring in millions of people: compassionate to whom? To those suffering the destruction? And in the long run it is not clear that the immigrants will gain – this true in a number of ways. For example, even the new immigrants will, and frequently do(57), resist further immigration after a point(58) – perhaps as, in relation to the area in question, a sense of territorialism and ownership develop to a certain extent(59). The short term gains enjoyed by immigrants might not be worthwhile even for them in the long run. And then there is the alleged economic argument. If all the figures (immigration has caused many costs to Britain(60)) and the long-term economic projections are taken into account, it is not clear that immigration is an economic benefit to Britain, in fact, the reverse is true(61). One can view this from the example of one hypothetical immigrant: he either works and thus takes a job(62) a Brit could have done(63), and pays taxes that a Brit could have paid. Alternatively, he takes benefits. Where is the economic gain coming from(64)? Are these immigrants all arriving and dropping off large amounts of cash that they brought with them? Well the truth is that millions of pounds leave the country every month as immigrants send money back home (plus benefits are sent abroad by the government too, etc.). We are not gaining money here, and even if we were, is it worth the destruction? As Hitchens writes in relation to immigration:
“ is impossible not to be angry with the politicians who either couldn’t imagine what their policies would bring in practice, or did not care. The destruction of familiarity and security cannot be measured in money.”(65)

How much would you sell your country, peace, freedom, quality of life, culture, heritage, children and race for? Even were there to be a financial gain (which there is not here(66)), is this moral? Are we for sale? What possibly could be worth selling your race for? Of course, all this destruction is predictable, and is documented around the world and across history – which begs the question: who would implement such a policy, and why?

Immigration presents destruction, and it just isn’t worth it.

(1) As background reading to many of the points in this article, please read Dr Thomas Turner’s book:
“MULTICULTURALISM” – WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Smokescreens and Mirrors (2013)
Available on Amazon at:
(2)In some senses, immigration is inevitably destructive, and other means of destruction are context-specific. Examples of both forms of destruction will be noted below.
(3)To intentionally cause a race to cease to exist is genocide. Under the UN definition of genocide, physical violence is not necessary, and merely bringing about the physical conditions that reduce the population, with the intent to so do, qualifies as genocide. Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide states that genocide can be defined, amongst other things, as: ‘Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part’ with ‘intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.’ The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was Adopted by Resolution 260 of the U.N. General Assembly on the 9th December 1948
(4)It is facts such as these that have prompted various survival campaigns, such as the ‘’multiculturalism’ is genocide’, ‘anti-racist is a code word for anti-white’ and ‘diversity is death’ campaigns, e.g. see:
(5)A variable level depending on the context
(6)I.e. possibly ‘both’ if there are only 2 cultures in question, and possibly ‘all’ in cases in which there are more than 2 cultures relevant
(7)See Dr Turner’s book:
(8)As has the immigrant culture
(9)Or more than two if more than 2 cultures are relevant
(10)Of course, sometimes areas split so that different cultures are practised (to a large extent at least) in different areas, also see:
If areas of territory are given away to immigrants, then this destroys the intact nature of the indigenous culture. And why would a country do that?
In such cases, intangible space is still shared, at least to some extent, and this, amongst other things, can present various issues (see Dr Turner’s book qv)
(12)E.g. see:
In the US, the inhibitions on celebrating Christmas are called ‘war on Christmas’ by some, e.g. see:
(13)This dilemma also means that if ‘multiculturalism’ is defined as ‘everyone practising their own culture’ or ‘all cultures being preserved’, then this is not possible in shared space – rendering this definition of ‘multiculturalism’ impossible to achieve in practice in cases of immigration (see Turner’s book qv)
(14)Trust suffers destruction in various ways and by various means, for example: trust between people is diminished by a number of processes; trust in the justice system is reduced by various means; etc. As with destruction of the other factors noted here, reductions in trust can have many deleterious consequences for the country.
(15)This cause of stress, as with many of the other stresses caused by immigration, might be a contributory factor to the increase in psychological problems that has occurred
(16)Also see: Telegraph 29th January 2013
(19)Also see:
(20)Telegraph 25th November 2004
(21)Inter-group conflict characterises such diversity.
(22)Conflict is found between immigrant groups, e.g. see:
and also between immigrant groups and the indigenous people, e.g. see:
(24)For further reading on threats to freedom of speech in Britain see:
Johnston, P. (2013) Feel Free to Say It. Threats to Freedom of Speech in Britain Today. Civitas, London.
Also, relatedly, see:
(28)If this principle of being policed, judged, etc. only by one’s own group is thought through, then this is an argument for separation – if this is followed, then mixed areas are not feasible
(29)E.g. for such accusations see:–4120569
(30)E.g. see:
(31)In an ironic, manipulative, dishonest and inversionist manner, immigration is often sold to people as being fair and just.
(32)Also see:
(33)E.g. see the inequalities presented by affirmative action: members of one race (s) are given favourable treatment for jobs, educational places, etc.
(34)Also see:
(35)In many areas with high immigrant populations, children no longer have the freedom to go out play like they used to. This is another reduction in freedom and also of quality of life.
(36)E.g. over 1,400 in one town (Rotherham) in just 16 years is documented.
(37)To whom? To the rape and abuse victims?
(39)This touches on the cover-up of the true results of immigration. The media and government act to conceal the truth from the public by various means, e.g.: the censorship, the lies, the ‘finding positive stories’ about immigration, etc.
(42)Of course, other factors may be at play here too, including the fact that if the British public knew of the levels of abuse, then immigration might not be tolerated. There are accusations that the Labour Party dealt for votes, but this is not proven. Many factors are causal here, and different causes are more significant for different people.
(44)Indirect means include factors such as that when the people are divided and oppressed, then feelings of consideration, trust, care, etc. in a general sense diminish and this tends to breed crime. Other indirect factors come into play, such as that the poverty brought to normal indigenous people by immigration tends to increase the likelihood of crime being committed by them. There are many other such indirect factors that result from immigration and its consequences.
(48)There are other related problems, such as one Jewish MP who no longer holds MP surgeries because of inter-ethnic threats, see:
(49)Some define ‘multiculturalism’ as such ‘moral relativism’ – see Dr Turner’s book qv
(50)The poor are made poorer by immigration, also see:
(53)Those implementing and/or propagandising mass immigration very rarely send their children to the schools that are most affected by immigration. Many inner city comprehensives suffer terrible problems with inter-group conflicts, lower standards, non-English speakers taking teaching time and #lowering educational standards, etc. E.g. see:
For example, black Labour MP Dianne Abbott opted for a private education for her son, as do many such ‘leftie’/’liberal’ MPs, or they chose a state school in a good area (to get a nice time and good education, without admitting they are opting out of the mess they have created).
Senior Guardian Newspaper writers have their children sent to private schools, not affected by the destruction that they propagandise for the rest of us, see:
(54)Also see destruction of quality of life as pressure is placed on resources, including the NHS, schools, police and justice system, roads, water, housing, etc. E.g.
(55)As opposed to some forms that are context-specific
(56)It is not ‘rocket salad’, merely salad with a different recipe
(57)The resistance usually is found towards those of different races, not to more of their own race. There are reasons why immigrants might not resist, e.g. if this appears a poor tactic for them, etc.
(58)E.g. in Sheffield there are problems between the Roma immigrants just arriving and the Pakistanis who arrived earlier
(59)If mass immigration never stops, then apart from the small islands being over-crowded, there is the issue that nobody ever has a home as such – it is never-ending destruction and turmoil
(60)Many such calculations only focus on unemployment benefits verses tax revenues, but ignore many benefits such as tax credits, child benefits, etc. Also, even without the benefits, there are many other financial costs that have been caused by immigration into Britain (both directly and indirectly) – factors such as: translation services; financial costs of race riots; extra policing costs in general; government posts in ‘community relations/diversity officers’, etc.; the ‘multiculturalism’ industry in general; etc.
(61)Of course, different groups of immigrants present different financial issues. In the UK, third world immigration is particularly expensive for the country.
(62)Some jobs are only for non-indigenous people, sometimes this is explicit whereas other times it is not stated but is the case. Also see:
(63)Unemployment rises as a result of immigrants taking jobs.
Also see:–and-foreign-jobseekers-even-get-travelling-costs-8734731.html
Many immigrant workers drive down wages and working conditions for indigenous people, this works in a number of ways including the fact that many immigrants live in a temporary manner (even though it might end up permanent) and hence have lower living expenses and can accept lower wages., (e.g. numerous people sharing a home deigned for many fewer). Other means by which this occurs include that fact that many immigrants arrive from countries with much lower wages/conditions/standards of living – hence we engage in a race to the bottom
(64)Some calculations disingenuously talk about the GDP, rather than GDP per capita. Of course, if there are more people, then this tends to push up the overall GDP, but that is not as relevant as is GDP per capita – which is a better measure of quality of life (from an economic perspective).
(66)Other than for some of the very wealthy

Political Persecution In The ‘FREE’ Country Of Great Britain

Written by Boadacea

Is one free to object to the political policy of immigration?

Often we hear about the oppressive regimes around the world, the absence of freedom in various countries and the political persecution of dissenters in those places. Frequently we are expected to give political asylum to those people who claim asylum in our country after them allegedly being persecuted for their beliefs in some horrible oppressive country elsewhere. We hear that the Muslims hate us and attack us because they ‘hate our freedoms’. There is a constant stream of statements that reinforce the belief, albeit sometimes by implication, that we in this country are ‘free’.

However, are we free? Are political dissenters persecuted, suppressed or oppressed? Are we free to discuss and hear political policies/ideas/facts?

Well of course we are not free. We live under a massive level of surveillance, with our communications, movements and data monitored and collected. We are forced to work for many extra hours a week to pay our taxes (being forced to work without reward and under duress is not being free). We can be arrested and imprisoned if we offend a member of a more important group(1) (yet us being offended counts for almost nothing(2)).However, here the focus is on the issue of political oppression. Is this country free in a political sense(3)? There are various ways in which political freedom could be examined. For example, may one express one’s political beliefs, proposed policies, etc. without fear or sanction? Are people free to examine and discuss political ideas and related facts (historical or otherwise)? Are certain political ideas suppressed, and their proponents persecuted? Are people scared to express certain dissenting views? Space does not permit a full examination of the concept of political freedom, and this short essay will focus on the issue of whether a particular political idea is suppressed, and its proponents oppressed and/or persecuted. Actually, it is a particular form of dissent – dissenting from the government’s political policy of mass immigration.

Is opposition to immigration inhibited in this ‘free’ country?
In a ‘free’ country a political view cannot be banned – that would expose lack of freedom; the people need to believe they are living in a ‘free democratic’ state, it helps to keep them from rising up against an oppressive regime. However, can a government suppress a dissenting view and/or oppress its proponents to the extent that the dissent poses no effective threat? Can the government with the arms of the state (and media, etc.) effectively suppress dissent to their political policy of mass immigration to the point that there is no effective opposition?

If people face persecution, and even prosecution, for expressing a certain political view and/or dissent to a certain political policy, then this is political suppression. If the arms of the state, including the state-broadcaster (the BBC), the education system, etc. all agree on a particular political policy and propagandise its greatness, then this can act to inhibit certain political ideas. If political parties (and/or their supporters) that object to a certain political policy face persecution by the state, then this is political oppression. If open debate on a government political policy is effectively impossible, then this is inhibition of dissent. If all major media organisations demonise those who express dissent to a political policy, then this has a psychological/emotional effect on the public, and acts to suppress dissent. If the information given to the public in relation to a political policy (and related matters) is distorted or censored, and even untrue, then this can act to manipulate people and suppress dissent.

In relation to open debate and discussion of the political policy of mass immigration, it is almost impossible to hold a rational and fair debate on this topic. Debate is inhibited by various means. One such means of suppressing open debate is that of straightforward banning of debate. Often this is phrased in a saccharin-coated phrase such as ‘no platform for ‘racists’’ or ‘no platform for fascists’ and suchlike rather than openly stating that this idea is banned from discussion.



The National Union of Students (NUS) bans any speech that is labelled by them as ‘racist’ or ‘fascist’; this ban under the ‘no platform’ guise(4). People using these sorts of phrases attempt to deceive others as to what is really going on: really these people are stopping certain political ideas, facts, beliefs, etc. from being stated or heard. This ‘no platform’ also achieves many other matters, including: giving the impression, albeit by implication, that dissenters are not worthy of being heard; achieving an ‘immunity from criticism (or truth)’(5); etc. However, by claiming a ‘high moral ground’ this ban on debate purports to be for some sort of moral reasons. Of course, the nebulous-power-word ‘racism’ is not a proper word, so such cries are not rational(6). Also, the term ‘fascist’ is thrown around in a non-rational manner (see Orwell(7)), in fact, often in an ironic manner; could it not be classed as ‘fascist’ under some of its definitions to ban open debate of dissenting views? Could one not label the banning of certain inconvenient truths as fascist?

This silencing of certain political ideas/beliefs, etc. is found in many contexts. As well as the ‘no platform’ in universities, there is a ban on dissent in many other contexts (including businesses, schools, state organisations such as the NHS, etc.) and only certain views can be heard or stated. Even during our elections such silencing is found to occur. For example, Mr Nick Griffin was not allowed to give his election declaration speech on stage during the 2001 elections, this prompting Mr Griffin and Mr Treacy to wear gags while on the stage with the other candidates(8):



In some contexts gagging of dissenters is claimed to be for reasons of ‘maintaining the peace’ or ‘community cohesion’ or suchlike – this usually prompted by threats or actual instances of violence(9) and other crimes by ‘lefties’ and/or immigrants.


So violence by those supporting the government’s political views is used as an excuse to gag dissenters(10). Surely the police should act to stop the violence? Enforce the law? Would such threats, were they ever to occur, by anti-immigration proponents be pandered to in this manner? Does this mean that the most criminal and violent win? Is this a safe message for the state to be sending out? Is this moral? Interestingly, those threatening and involved in such crime and violence frequently are linked to the government in various ways(11), which might explain the lack of the law being enforced when they break it(12). Such people could hence be being used by the government as a form of informal/unaccountable/deniable enforcers(13). Such people act as state-sponsored enforcers, but with full deniability by the state(14). This all further acts to intimidate the people from dissenting to this government policy.


Another means by which dissent from the political policy of immigration is inhibited is, of course, the fear of being labelled ‘racist’. ‘Racism’ is a nebulous-power-word, not a properly-defined term, and should not be used in rational discourse. However, it is this very fact of low referentiality that largely contributes to the power of this term (as analysed and explained by Dr Thomas Turner(15)). The establishment has contributed significantly to the social construction of this term (see Dr Turner’s book qv). People fear the consequences of being labelled as ‘racist’ – these consequences including the social(16), financial, legal and also the physical fear of being attacked by ‘anti-racists’ and/or immigrants. Most people understand that the law is not properly/fully enforced against the immigrants or ‘anti-racists’ in this context(17) – they have an almost free pass to enforce the will of the state against ‘racists’, including by use of violence (as noted above). Hence, people are intimidated into silence and acquiescence. Dissent is inhibited.

In fact, people are too scared even to state certain truths in relation to immigration for fear of being labelled ‘racist’ – by this means open and honest debate is further inhibited as many do not even have the true facts to consider. Many truths cannot be stated, and ‘racism’ is not the only excuse for suppression of truth – other means including those of ‘causing offence’, ‘stirring hatred’ and matters such a ‘maintaining community relations’ (often code for: not letting the people know the truth in case they rise up; having no riots; there being no challenge or disruption to government immigration policy; etc.). If one states certain matters one can be accused of being ‘an extremist’, a ‘right wing extremist’, ‘threat to security’, ‘dangerous agitator’, or other scary-sounding labels – such labels can, amongst other things, render one liable for various acts of state suppression and the government is currently seeking more legislation to further silence such truths and debate. The government deems such people as a danger to the state. More honest people will be imprisoned. When true facts that pertain to government policy are suppressed, then this is not political liberty. Neither is this moral nor honest. However, in an inversionist manner, those stating the truth and acting with honour will be imprisoned under the manipulative lie of them being ‘evil’. This is not open and honest debate, and this is not freedom.
Political parties and other organisations that object to the political policy of mass immigration are subject to much suppression and persecution. Of course the general factors, including those noted above, apply also here. The mainstream media, including the BBC, make sure that the coverage of such parties is very unfavourable, and frequently the coverage is dishonest (the BBC is not impartial as its charter states). Hence, the unsuspecting public often believe such parties to be dangerous and monstrous. This distorts the democratic political process. However, the persecution and suppression of such parties and organisations also is conducted by many other means. For example, a police officer was forced to resign after being seen while off duty at a football match wearing a BNP badge(18). Have any public servants been punished in any way for wearing other forms of political badges(19) while off duty, e.g. any pro-immigration badges? So it is permissible to support the policies of the government in relation to mass immigration, but not to dissent from them (even while off duty). Many have faced persecution for belonging to or even merely supporting the BNP. For example, a bus driver was sacked for belonging to the BNP(20). The BBC sent an undercover journalist to film Mr Nick Griffin giving a speech and this resulted in Mr Griffin facing two criminal trials – and he was not convicted of any crime(21). During his speech in 2004  he predicted that Muslims would launch an attack on our country and objected to the sexual ‘grooming’ and rape of our children (before any reports such as in Rotherham were released). His predictions and claims were proven to be accurate and true. It is fair to conclude that those organisations (including political parties) dissenting from the establishment’s support for the political policy of immigration do face suppression and persecution. Such suppressive acts not only directly inhibit dissent (and truth), but also others are frightened from dissenting.


There are various pieces of legislation that act in such a manner as to suppress dissent, this by threat of arrest, (e.g. ‘hate laws’). For example, words that might ‘insult’ and ‘stir up hatred’ can result in imprisonment(22). The application of these laws has disproportionately been such that they act to suppress dissent(23). Of course, as is frequently found in this ‘soft totalitarian’(24) state, this is all wrapped up in a cloak of ‘compassion’ and ‘moral values’. But to whom is the compassion being shown? To those who object to what is fairly described as an invasion of the country? As genocide(25)? Can the indigenous people not object to these hateful acts being perpetrated upon them without being arrested (and, ironically, accused of hatred)? Would hatred not be valid in some such instances? Should one hate those who have facilitated or committed mass rape of children or genocide? Does this situation not alarm and distress normal people? Why should the state think it is acceptable to arrest people for their beliefs and emotions anyway? Does the invasion and mass rape not offend you? Are you not offended, insulted or distressed that, by various means, you dare not object to this? Not even to the genocide? Feel threatened or alarmed? And is it moral to ban the truth? How can proper political decisions be made if based on lies and not on truth? Why should ‘offence’ or ‘insult’ be criminalised – and also only is certain contexts? If a comment were to stir up hatred(26) against a group, then if the statement is true, perhaps that group should not be loved, hey? If there were truths that if stated might offend or insult a group (s), or even stir up hatred, then to ban their statement is still to ban truth and takes away true and useful information from the public.This legislation can act to disempower the true victims in many cases, and to give the false impression that the perpetrators are the victims. Also it can act, inter alia, to protect the perpetrators from truth (in case they don’t like to hear it, and/or possibly face the consequences of it becoming widely known). So if the presence of group X meant a significant increase in rapes of children from group Y by group X, then one could not say this because group X might not like it (never mind what group Y don’t like, including their children getting raped, some groups are more equal than others). Better to pretend we are all the same (and at the same time don’t forget to celebrate the diversity!). If group B get arrested or stopped by the police at twice the rate of group A, then even if this were because group B committed twice the rate of crime, one could not state this fact/truth in case group B were insulted and this fact might cause resentment of group B. Better to let them off the crimes they commit and equalise the arrest figures, never mind if the other people are victimised by the crimes (and not to bother if any of this alarms/distresses/threatens/insults them, or even could be interpreted as inciting hatred against them). This all acts to suppress certain truths and challenges to government policy – and often in an insidious and surreptitious manner.

Hence, by various means there is a lack of freedom in this country in relation to the political freedom of dissenting from the government political policy of mass immigration. People are misinformed and are intimidated by various means. Dissenters are oppressed and are susceptible to prosecution by the state. Organisations and political parties dissenting are liable to much mistreatment from the state – this is political persecution.

You will acquiesce, you will not dissent. It’s called freedom. Orwell warned us about this:
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

2.Even those in government can insult the English and/or the British without sanction – and certainly without going to prison. For example, saying the English are a race too lazy or incapable of working, etc. is fine, but don’t say it about Africans, etc.
3.Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:
‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’
5. ‘Immunity from criticism’ refers to the fact that if no criticism, challenge, debate, alternative ideas, etc. are allowed, then those with this immunity can merely state their ideas, beliefs, policies, etc. and do not have to face any criticism or challenge on them. Such people do not need to defend what they say in any way and can merely state what they wish and leave the impression almost as though it is correct and perfect – with no alternatives.
6. See Dr. T. Turner
7. George Orwell is quoted as stating that: ‘The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’’
9. See:
11. These links to the establishment, frequently by those purporting to be ‘anti-establishment’, will be examined in a forthcoming essay
12. Ironically and dishonestly, many of these types pose as very ‘anti-establishment’ and rebellious.
14. And of course not all of them are in direct contact with the state in relation to the enforcement, but most of them understand that they will be very unlikely to be held account for threats, violence, etc. against anti-immigration people. Of course, some of them are in direct contact as will be discussed in future essays.
16. Many fear social rejection if labelled as such a ‘witch’
17. Also see:
19. Communist badges? Even anarchists badges?
20. But won on appeal as this breached his human rights, e.g. see:
22. For further reading on threats to freedom of speech in Britain see:
Johnston, P. (2013) Feel Free to Say It. Threats to Freedom of Speech in Britain Today. Civitas, London.
Also, relatedly, see:
23. One could interpret some of this legislation in such a manner that it would render many politicians guilty of the offences therein. For example the Public Order Act 1986 makes it, amongst other things, a criminal offence to state certain matters that threaten, abuse or insult and are likely to stir up racial hatred. Are not many pro-immigration speeches thus covered? What about those who state that the immigrants ‘do the jobs Brits are too lazy to do’?
26. And how can this be shown to be the case? When would it not be resentment, disapproval or disgust, etc. and actually be hatred? Besides, how could causing hatred even be thought in a sane world #to be illegal?

Christmas Gift Ideas From The Cigpapers Blog

Christmas is a traditional time in Europe for the exchange of gifts between family and friends.

A traditional British family Christmas.

A traditional British family Christmas. However the little White girl now has a 6% chance of becoming a sex-slave to  islamic slave traders in Britain.

At the Cigpapers blog we decided to put together some White survivalist related Christmas gifts. These will be delivered to you First Class recorded, or sent straight to the gift recipient with free Christmas gift wrapping and gift tag if required.

Are you really putting up with this multicultural shit any longer?

Are you really putting up with this multicultural shit any longer?

For orders from outside the UK please email for a price on delivery.

Just how thrilled would your family and friends be with White survivalist gifts?

Just how thrilled would your family and friends be with White survivalist related gifts?

Here are some gift packages we put together:

1. Four A3 Size White Survivalist Posters £10:

A pack of four White survivalist posters in A3 size (30cmX42cm). Full colour lithograph printed these look stunning as either a simple poster or framed in an A3 frame. There are presently four different designs:





Pack of four different A3 White survivalist posters.

Pack of four different A3 White survivalist posters.

Choose any combination of the four in the message box on your Paypal payment to – please note no Paypal account is required. The price is £10 for a four pack or £16 for an eight pack, due to savings on postage.

2. Framed A3 Size White Survivalist Poster £10:

A choice of one of four White survivalist posters in A3 size (30cmX42cm). Full colour lithograph printed these look stunning  framed in a wood and glass A3 frame(37cmX49cm). There are presently four different designs to choose from:





Choose from any of the four designs in this glass and wood frame. White corners are only for protection and can be removed.

Choose from any of the four designs in this glass and wood frame. White corners are only for protection and can be removed.

Choose any one of the four in the message box on your Paypal payment to – please note no Paypal account is required. The price is £20 for one or £25 for any two, due to savings on postage.

3. White Survivalist Starter Pack:

175 MULTICULTURALISM IS GENOCIDE lithograph printed roadside stickers and 175 COUDENHOVE-KALERGI PLAN FOR EUROPEAN GENOCIDE A5 150gsm leaflets.

Bring some Yuletide cheer with this gift pack.

Bring some Yuletide cheer with this gift pack.

A great starter pack for anyone beginning to fightback against White genocide. The perfect gift for anyone at £14 including recorded delivery.

Don't let the jew-socialists destroy Christmas and the White race.

Don’t let the jew-socialists destroy Christmas and the White race.

Are White Britains Treated As Second Class In Their Own Country?


Written by Brittania

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

Are white British people, the indigenous people of Britain, treated with the same consideration, respect, care and concern as other people are ………..…as immigrants are?

Imagine a country that was built, developed and defended for thousands of years by a beautiful, fair, strong, smart, brave and creative indigenous people. The country flourished and the people were happy. Then imagine a hostile government takes control of the country and floods in millions of immigrants, this invasion to the detriment of the indigenous people. Thousands of the indigenous women and children are raped by the immigrants, poverty increases for the indigenous people, but they are not allowed to fight back, in fact, they are not even allowed to express dissent. They are to submit to the invasion, the occupation, all the deprivations and harms, and they are to remain silent about it. In fact, in a cruel and controlling manner, the government tries to make them celebrate the invasion (and finance it and its associated costs). There will be no more indigenous people in time; some of the government and their friends openly boast of this fact, of a future when the race of indigenous people with their fair skins will no longer exist and ‘everyone will be coffee-coloured’. Have these indigenous people been treated as inferior in any way?



Mass immigration has brought much suffering and harm to the indigenous people of Britain(1), including: the increases in many types of crime, such as the many thousands of rapes, many victims merely children; the importation of diseases; the lowering of wages and working conditions for the non-wealthy; reductions in freedoms; inhibition of indigenous culture; the shortages of and strains on resources, including housing; financial burdens in taxes; race riots; the strife and stress that diversity brings, including the reductions in fraternity, security and social capital; etc. Without immigration, the people of this country would not suffer these problems that immigration has brought(2). Indigenous people have suffered for the gain of immigrants…so one group loses for another group to gain… ‘equality’ anyone?

Picture 9

On a fundamental level, immigrants want to come and most indigenous people do not want them to – one group’s preferences are put above those of a less important group (the ‘second class’/’inferior’ indigenous group). If an immigrant wants a better life, then indigenous people are to have a worse life to facilitate this. Some suggest limiting your birth rates to accommodate immigrants (3), but their wanting to move to your country is not to be limited, oh no. Immigration has caused areas of the country to be largely occupied by immigrant groups – the government has effectively given parts of the land away without the consent of the indigenous people. White Brits are now the minority in London(4). Your land was given away, theirs was not. Not very ‘equal’. Perhaps less easily remedied, there is the threat of genocide to the indigenous people(5). Territory and existence are fundamental to a group, and both are threatened by immigration. These threats and realities cause stress and concern amongst indigenous people, but not amongst immigrants (since they are not losing anything in this respect).


The very fact of immigration puts one group (the immigrants) above the other group in relation to many issues. In this sense, there cannot be ‘equality’ as between immigrants and indigenous people, because the very fact of immigration has breached many of the ‘rights’ of indigenous people and has put the immigrants’ desires and wants as more important than those of the indigenous people. In the social and political sense, ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word(6), but many of its forms are simply not possible in the context of immigration: these two concepts are incompatible.

Not happening!

Not happening!

Indigenous people are also treated as second class in other ways. Can you object to immigration? Immigrants can object to anything you do, but can you really object to them being here? Not always easy without some potential loss to yourself. This loss in freedom of speech(7) again is not applied equally, and even if it were, it is only the indigenous people who would wish to exercise it. Various means are used to silence dissent, of course the nebulous-power-word ‘racism’(8) is thrown around, but also certain legal, social, financial and professional consequences can ensue if one dares to object – and they are going to make the grip on free speech even tighter yet(9) (if they can get away with it).

Picture 9

And how does the legal system treat you? We frequently hear that blacks are picked on by the police, (e.g. with more stop and searches than whites); but is this proportionate to the amount of crime they commit? Are men ‘picked on’ by the police by being stopped for rapes at a higher rate than women are? If crime rates differ, then police action rates also should reflect this were the police to be acting ‘equally’ in this respect. Where there is a glaring inequality before the law is in relation to the manner in which the legal system bends over backwards not to ‘offend’ immigrants, this at the expense of the indigenous white Brits. For example, the mass child rape and abuse noted in Rotherham was allowed to continue for decades(10). Would the legal system have allowed thousands of little black or Asian girls to be raped and abused by white men for decades(11)? And the police response time?…well, 16 years and still waiting…And the ‘racial equality’ laws, well, again, not really applied in an equal manner. For example, a pack attack on a white woman by immigrants shouting ‘kill the white slag’ is not considered as a racial(12)…imagine the other way round…well, imagine it, but don’t speak of it cause that might cause offence….and nobody wants to be called ‘racist’, or arrested(13).


And the media, all heard of Stephen Lawrence? Of course you have, the government (= the working man and woman paying taxes) has spent untold fortunes in relation to this case, and even changed the law so that defendants can be tried again(14) if acquitted (double jeopardy). Another fundamental protection removed to please immigrants (and, inter alia, to suppress and oppress indigenous people). But what about the little girl murdered on the bus by a black man while she was on her way to school? Vaguely remember the case? But can you remember her name(15)? What about a black man raping many elderly people in their own homes? Know his name(16)? Or any black cannibals in recent times(17)? Got any names? Has Kriss Donald’s(18) family been lavished with awards and money by the government? Any award ceremonies being held in his name(19)? Does the media frequently mention his name? Or any white victims’ names? When a little white girl as tortured and repeatedly raped and then taken to be shot dead, the media description on the day of the then wanted suspects omitted their race, but managed to broadcast that the car was ‘maroon’ in colour(20). Do you know her name? Does the media make all victims’ and perpetrators’ names equally salient to the public? Or are indigenous people not shown the same concern as are immigrants? The media go to great lengths to conceal the level of crime committed by immigrants(21), and to mislead the public into believing that ‘whitey’ is the bad one(22). Immigration is to be portrayed as beneficial to the country, and immigrants as victims of bad whites. This misrepresentation of the truth is admitted to by various journalists(23), and such behaviour is actually found in various guidelines to journalists, e.g. that in relation to immigrants, journalists are told to ‘find positive stories’ (National Union of Journalists, NUJ, Guidelines). Mass deception(24), and since this gives preferential and unfairly favourable treatment to immigrants and thus lower concern to white Brits, then this is not treating white Brits with the same respect/concern as other groups are treated(25). Not to mention the media coverage of any political party that dares to object to immigration…


Often it is claimed that more immigrants should have certain jobs or educational places, etc. This might be labelled as affirmative action, ‘equality and diversity’(26) or suchlike(27), but if some groups are to be given the jobs/places, then this can only be at the expense of other people. To call this ‘equality’ is untrue: this is blatantly unequal and treats one group (white Brits) as second class. If you are not given the job because you are a white Brit, then you have been treated as lesser. And for a non-indigenous person to be given the favourable treatment, this can only mean unfavourable treatment to the white Brit. Can’t have one without the other.


Perhaps you are offended that you are being treated as a second class person in your own country, but the very idea of offence is not applied equally to you either. White Brits must be very careful not to offend the immigrants(28). However, if you are offended by their presence and/or by any of their behaviours, or even by the very fact that you are not considered as equal of respect as they are, then you better keep quiet about it. White Brits being offended does not count in the same way, and can cause problems for those who express it. Offence only really counts if it is immigrants offended this not an offensive fact? SShhhhhhhhhh…you mustn’t cause offence to the more important people. Their being offended is more important than your existence.


So, second class might not be strong enough, perhaps third or fourth, but remember not to complain about immigration. While you sit in a choked traffic jam from your cramped over-priced home on your way to work at a job under your immigrant affirmative-action-boss, working to pay high taxes to help support the immigration, remember that the stresses under which you live, the lack of freedoms, the crime, the occupation of your country, the genocide…remember that even if you feel offended by any of this, keep quiet and don’t say anything that might offend the masters. How low are you that you can’t even express dissent? Maybe not even fourth…



(1) #
(2) #
Also see:
(4) #
(5) #
(6) #
(7) #
(8) Dr Thomas E. Turner (2013) “MULTICULTURALISM” – WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Smokescreens and Mirrors
(9) #
(10) #
(11) #
(12) #
(13) #
(14) # Has one lawyer or media outlet mentioned that the media coverage might have rendered the second trial invalid? Many in the media covered the alleged killers in such a manner that could have prejudiced the trial and prevented a fair trial for the defendants. Never mind the numerous violations of their civil rights over the years.
(15) #
(16) #
(17) b#
(18) #
(19) # compare and contrast to Stephen Lawrence, e.g. see:
(20) #
(21) #
(22) #
(23) #
(24) #
(25) # Britain First campaigns to get the media to cover all victims to the same extent, e.g. see:
These campaigns include a protest outside Parliament in February 2012
(26) # An internally inconsistent phrase – there cannot be ‘equality’ in all senses if there is racial or ethnic diversity
(27) #
(28) #


Written by Cigpapers

Photos, Captions and “Stickering” by Watt Tyler

If you have read up on what multiculturalism is really about then you’ll realise we are facing genocide, and a lot sooner than the sixty to eighty years predicted by main stream politicians. Towards the end the sexual and physical violence against Whites will massively increase.


A5 size stickers (21cm X 15cm). They are offset print rather than a PC printer so will last several months outside.

If you’re not yet politically aware please read these articles and then come back to this page:

The Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan – The Genocide Of The People Of Europe

Join The British Truth Movement – Stop White Genocide

There are many organisations, and groups, now starting to fight back against the multicultural genocide of Britain, and other previously White Nations. What the whole British Truth Movement needs is a mass awakening of the brainwashed masses as to what multiculturalism is really about, and what it will mean for their descendants.


Sticker on a busy road in Trafford Park, Greater Manchester, England. In rush hours there is standing traffic making it easy to read.

The MULTICULTURALISM IS GENOCIDE sticker campaign is simply a re-branding exercise of the term “multiculturalism”. The stickers are offset printed and are A5 size or approximately 21cm X 15cm.


Another sticker up in Mottram, Tameside, Greater Manchester, England.

 The best places are on busy roads that have standing traffic during rush hours giving thousands of views every day. Also bus stops and above ATMs can give a large number of views every day.

Packets of stickers have already been sent to South Wales, Dundee, Blackpool, North London, Toronto (Canada) and other places. If you want any Paypal send £6:50 for a pack of 100 (one hundred) including UK first class recorded postage to  For other size packs, foreign postage costs or leaflets please email at same email address. If you can send a photo of a sticker with somewhere indicating where it is (and the place hasn’t already been done) we’ll send another 15 stickers free of charge.


Stickers by “Debbie” in Chapel-en-le-Frith, Capital of the High Peak, Derbyshire, England. Free pack of stickers on the way.

From the lads at Salford University who emailed this in and said

From the lads at Salford University (Lancashire,England) who emailed this in and said “We’re not all brainwashed, Globalist drones.” Thanks lads and a pack of free stickers on the way.


Good hit in Camden, London, England by a Southern Nationalist. Pack of stickers in the post.


Nice hit from the “Pie And Mash Squad” ( 5 words – We Go Where We Want ) at Clapton F.C. Free stickers posted.


Manchester Nationalists launch an early morning raid on the University of Manchester and surrounding areas. Stickers in the post.

Screenshot 2014-10-27 19.16.20

Jess Lishak Women’s Officer for @ManchesterSU shows her anti-White racism on Twitter on 22nd October 2014. Tweet her at @ExecTeam_Jess

Screenshot 2014-10-27 10.41.04

Rotherham Globalist reds are squealing about a team hitting Rotherham. Strange they never spoke out against Child gang rape. Sorry but no free stickers for this photo my Trotskyist chums.


National Strike Force (Merseyside Division) sent this in from Liverpool. They told us they did a full 100 pack of stickers across Liverpool and Birkenhead. Free stickers in the post.


Another photo from Liverpool docks – which used to have plenty of well paid jobs before Marxist union bosses shut it down.

Screenshot 2014-10-30 10.18.25

The Globalists/Reds have no real street presence North of Birmingham and are left squealing to Liverpool Council. Why not also grass us up to Luciana Berger the jewish Labour MP for Liverpool Jake? @JakeArmistead

Just come in from Salford BNP

Just come in from Salford BNP


Got this photo and the next three with the following email: “Stickers were sighted on the A406, some stickers have been there for 3 weeks. A sticker was also seen on the back of a road-sign on the A1055. Kind Regards “Anonymous”

Rich if you can email an address we’ll send you some free stickers.




This photo from Squires Gate railway station in Blackpool, Lancashire, England was sent in by the notorious Jack

This photo from Squires Gate railway station in Blackpool, Lancashire, England was sent in by the notorious Jack “Boots” Renshaw.


Blackpool Pleasure Beach in Lancashire, England gets a visit from National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit)


National Strike Force ( East Manchester Division ) sent this photo from their rampage through Manchester University campuses on 22nd January 2015. Deano told us: “The Manchester reds have melted away – there was no opposition at all.”


No one sent this to us but we found it on the sticker appears to be outside a shopping centre in Hungary.


This photo was also on the sticker also appears to be outside a shopping centre in Hungary. No gibbering outrage from Hungarian Globalist reds yet – maybe Globalists aren’t tolerated there.


National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) visited Blackpool for a day out. This isn’t one of our stickers but is very true.


National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) on their day out in Blackpool.


National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) again on their day out in Blackpool.


National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) yet again on their day out in Blackpool.


Salford, Lancashire, get a visit from a Pie And Mash Squad.


An interesting new look for a Labour Party sign in Stockport, Greater Manchester.


This photo and the one below have been sent in by National Action – one is Liverpool one is Birkenhead.



Looks like the scousers weren’t taken in by this propaganda for White genocide.


A pro White genocide advert in Manchester – swiftly dealt with by a local Nationalist.


Just come in from Liverpool Nationalists ( not sure which group/party) showing the World famous sticker in front of the quite well-known Liver Building.


Liverpool students sent this in and said “We’re sick of our crappy cultural-marxist lecturers who seem to wish they lived in a squat in the 1970s.”


Sent in by a National Front member from Stockport – free stickers in the post.


The sticker outside Everton’s football ground Goodison Park. This was sent in by some Autonomous Nationalists.


The sticker again outside Everton’s football ground Goodison Park at night. This was sent in by the same Autonomous Nationalists.


The sticker somewhere on Merseyside. This was sent in by the same Autonomous Nationalists.


The Unite Union are led by Len McCluskey and bankroll the U.A.F. to attack working-class British Nationalists opposing multicultural genocide.


This sticker in Accrington was sent in by a UK Nationalist.


Leicester gets a visit from West Midland Infidels.


One of the main drivers of anti-White racism is the constant references to the jewish slave trade, which has been turned in to a White slave trade of Africans. The Liverpool museum of slavery got a visit from National Action.


A White Rabbit in Hull sent this in.


Screenshot 2015-01-22 16.24.59

@ANecroticTide – a Manchester Globalist red is left seriously butt-hurt in Rusholme.

Screenshot 2015-01-22 16.27.19

Globalist Bristol teacher Suzanne Williams is left outraged by opposition to genocide in Staple Hill, Bristol. Another N.U.T. member no doubt.

Screenshot 2015-01-14 19.48.39

A Globalist Portsmouth University red @ConorNorf0lk was squealing on Twitter about our campaign hitting Portsmouth. No photos yet but will post when received.

Screenshot 2015-01-10 19.35.36

Globalist and Deputy Leader of Stockport Council LibDem Councillor Iain Roberts was strangely drawn to our stickers in Stockport. Expect your neighbourhood to be flooded with leaflets and stickers Councillor Roberts!

Screenshot 2015-01-14 20.34.58

Another self-hating White from Salford was left outraged by opposition to genocide. Thanks for the mention @katieshark

Derby Telegraph has covered our campaign here

Derby Telegraph has covered our campaign here


These are some stickers being put out by the Church of Creativity against White genocide – sorry but we don’t have any. Contact them through

FOR LEGAL REASONS : Please get the permission of the owners of any property you put the stickers on. By purchasing these stickers and/or submitting photo(s) you are agreeing to these terms and conditions.

Globalist Reds Fight Back With Their Own Stickers:


A weak effort from Salford Globalist reds here on Ordsall Lane. I think you’re going to need bigger stickers my socialist chums. As always no free stickers for cultural-marxists.


A notorious Globalist red who works as a cleaner at Manchester University was putting these out in Salford: “Burn the flag I have no country I am an anarchist I don’t believe in states borders or government I want to be rid of them all” We should point out to Paul K. that his minimum wage cleaning job at the University wouldn’t exist without the State, nor would his tax credits.


A group of Globalist socialist political posers known as the “161Crew” from Manchester have put these up around Manchester. The 161Crew affiliate themselves with F.C. United of Manchester who are currently playing at Tameside Stadium. Several deals between F.C.U.M. and Labour run Greater Manchester Councils are currently being investigated by this blog.

Screenshot 2015-05-14 10.07.58

Even for a Globalist red it was pretty weird to put notes up trying to support multiculturalism – still if it keeps them busy and away from kids it can’t be that bad.


A sticker in Gorton, East Manchester was sprayed over in orange with an anarchy sign sprayed above. Maybe it was a Dutch anarchist or a Blackpool fan.


This sticker was in Mossley in the Pennines. You’ll notice the typical socialist half-arsed attack on it. After failing to rip it down they followed up with a crap attempt at covering it up.

Did NASA Use Nazi War Criminals To Fake The Apollo Moon Landings? 20 Amazing Facts

Written by Cigpapers

Photos, Captions and Videos by Watt Tyler

NASA Apollo Moon Landing - Did they make it or did they fake it?

NASA Apollo Moon Landing – did they make it or did they fake it?

On the 20th July 1969 NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) claimed to have landed the first men on the Moon (Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin) with their Apollo 11 mission. NASA claimed to have made another five manned Moon landings ( Apollo Missions 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17) with Apollo 17 being the final mission landing on 7th December 1972. NASA still claims a total of 12 American astronauts walked on the Moon. All the alleged Moon landings used the Saturn V rocket system. The total cost of the Apollo missions is estimated at £203 billion in 2013 US dollars.

NASA was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and became operational on October 1, 1958.

NASA was established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and became operational on 1st October  1958.

NASA gives the distance from the centre of Earth to the centre of the Moon as 239,000 miles. Since the Earth has a radius of about 4,000 miles and the Moon’s radius is roughly 1,000 miles, that leaves a surface-to-surface distance of 234,000 miles. The total distance traveled during the alleged missions, including Earth and Moon orbits, ranged from 622,268 miles for Apollo 13 to 1,484,934 miles for Apollo 17. It is accepted by the majority of People that the Apollo Moon landings were genuine, however the Cuban School National Curriculum and a growing number of sceptics claim the Apollo missions were faked. Even though this blog in no way alleges that Nazi war criminals faked the Moon landings we did find these 20 amazing facts:

1. Wernher von Braun:

Wernher Magnus Maximilian, Freiherr von Braun (March 23, 1912 – June 16, 1977) was a German rocket engineer and space architect. He was one of the leading figures in the development of rocket technology in Germany during World War II and, subsequently, in the United States. He is credited as being the “Father of Rocket Science”. In his 20s and early 30s, von Braun was the central figure in the Nazis’ rocket development program, responsible for the design and realization of the V-1 and V-2 combat rockets during World War II.

One of von Braun's V-2 Nazi rockets from World War Two.

One of von Braun’s V-2 Nazi rockets from World War Two. Firing these on a civilian population was a war crime.

Werner von Braun’s SS number was 185,068 and his Nazi Party membership number was 5,738,692, he ended the war as a SS Major. After the war, he and some select members of his rocket team were taken to the United States as part of the then-secret Operation Paperclip.

Wernher Von Braun in 1941.

Wernher von Braun in 1941. If it hadn’t been for Operation Paperclip von Braun and his team would almost certainly have faced war crime charges at Nuremberg for their role in the V-1 and V-2 rocket attacks on England during World War Two.

Operation Paperclip involved the USA taking a large number of German scientists, technicians and other staff to the USA after the war. The USA also appropriated about 300,000 German scientific patents.

Werner von Braun with American President John F Kennedy.

Werner von Braun with American President John F Kennedy.

 Former Nazi “Peenemunde” V-1 assistant Kurt H. Debus – who went on to become the first director of the Kennedy Space Center – helped develop the Saturn V rockets (designed in part after their V-1 Nazi rockets)


Kurt H Debus became the first Director Of John F Kennedy Space Centre.

Werner Von Braun with the Saturn V rocket carrying the Apollo 11 Lunar Mission in 1969.

Werner von Braun in Florida with the Saturn V rocket carrying the Apollo 11 Lunar Mission in 1969.

2. Die Frau im Mond (The Woman in the Moon) Film:

In 1929 a German filmmaker called Fritz Lang released a silent film called Die Frau im Mond (The Woman in the Moon). The film’s technical adviser on the film was Herman Oberth, considered to be one of the three founding fathers of rocketry. Assisting Oberth on the film project was one of his brightest students, teenager Wernher von Braun.

The totally unnecessary vertical construction of the spaceship in a specially built hangar is the same in the film and the Apollo Missions.

The totally unnecessary vertical construction of the spaceship in a specially built hangar is the same in the film Die Frau im Mond  and the Apollo Missions.

A decade-and-a-half later, both Oberth and von Braun would be scooped up through Operation Paperclip and brought to America to work on the Apollo Missions, whose choreography just happened to very closely match that of the fake Moon launch Oberth and von Braun had crafted forty years earlier.

Another still from the 1929 film.

Another still from the 1929 film.

Maybe it’s just a coincidence that a 1929 silent German film had the same rocket technology as 1960s/70s American Moon landings.

The grand opening of the massive hangar doors and the excruciatingly slow roll-out of the upright rocketship from the hangar to the launch pad are the same in the 1929 film and the Apollo Missions.

The grand opening of the massive hangar doors and the excruciatingly slow roll-out of the upright rocket ship from the hangar to the launch pad are the same in the 1929 film and the Apollo Missions.

Both the film (Die Frau im Mond) and the Apollo Missions also both had the famous countdowns and the cheering, patriotic crowds.

Cheering crowds during teh countdown in the 1929 film.

Cheering crowds during the countdown in the 1929 film.

Screenclip  from the silent film "Die Frau im Mond".

Screenclip from the silent film “Die Frau im Mond”.

The 1929 silent film  Die Frau im Mond had a storyline that was a cross between Apollo Mission 11 (first alleged man on the Moon) and Apollo Mission 13 (aborted Moon landing after an oxygen tank allegedly exploded).

Not Jim Lovell on Apollo Mission 13 but actually the 1929 film "Die Frau im Mond".

Not Jim Lovell on Apollo Mission 13 but actually the 1929 film “Die Frau im Mond”.

The 1929 silent film  Die Frau im Mond and the 1960s/1970s Apollo Missions both had the same team of technical advisers.

3. America Versus Russia In The Space Race:

After World War Two America and Russia entered in to an arms race and a space race. Until the Apollo Moon landings Russia had beaten the Americans in every “first” in the space race:

            May 15, 1957 – The Soviet Union tests the R-7 Semyorka, the world’s first intercontinental ballistic missile.

         October 4, 1957 – The Soviets launch Sputnik 1, Earth’s first manmade satellite.

         November 3, 1957 – A dog named Laika becomes the first animal to enter Earth orbit aboard the Soviet Sputnik 2.

         January 2, 1959 – The Soviet Luna 1 becomes the first manmade object to leave Earth’s orbit.

         September 13, 1959 – After an intentional crash landing, the Soviet Luna 2 becomes the first manmade object on the Moon.

         October 6, 1959 – The Soviet Luna 3 provides mankind with its first look at the far side of the Moon.

         August 20, 1960 – Belka and Strelka, aboard the Soviet Sputnik 5, are the first animals to safely return from Earth orbit.

         October 14, 1960 – The Soviet Marsnik 1, the first probe sent from Earth to Mars, blasts off.

         February 12, 1961 – The Soviet Venera 1, the first probe sent from Earth to Venus, blasts off.

         April 12, 1961 – Yuri Gagarin, riding aboard the Soviet Vostok 1, becomes the first man in Earth orbit.

         May 19, 1961 – The Soviet Venera 1 performs the first ever fly by of another planet (Venus).

         August 6, 1961 – Gherman Titov, aboard the Soviet Vostok 2, becomes the first man to spend over a day in space and the first to sleep in Earth orbit.

         August 11 & 12, 1962 – The Soviet Vostok 3 and Vostok 4 are launched, the first simultaneous manned space flights (though they do not rendezvous).

         October 12, 1964 – The Soviet Voskhod 1, carrying the world’s first multi-man crew, is launched.

         March 18, 1965 – Aleksei Leonov, riding aboard the Soviet Voskhod 2, performs the first space-walk.

         February 3, 1966 – The Soviet Luna 9 becomes the first probe to make a controlled, ‘soft’ landing on the Moon.

         March 1, 1966 – The Soviet Venera 3, launched November 16, 1965, becomes the first probe to impact another planet (Venus).

         April 3, 1966 – The Soviet Luna 10 becomes the first manmade lunar satellite.

        October 30, 1967 – The Soviet Cosmos 186 and Cosmos 188 become the first unmanned spacecraft to rendezvous and dock in Earth orbit. The United States will not duplicate this maneuver for nearly four decades.

        January 16, 1969 – The Soviet Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5 become the first manned spacecraft to dock in Earth orbit and the first to exchange crews.

        November 17, 1970 – The Soviet Lunokhod 1, the first robotic rover to land on and explore an extraterrestrial body, lands on the Moon. Twenty-seven years later, the United States lands it’s very first robotic rover on Mars.

        December 15, 1970 – The Soviet Venera 7 becomes the first probe to make a soft landing on another planet (Venus).

        April 19, 1971 – The Soviet Salyut 1 becomes the world’s first orbiting space station.

        August 22, 1972 – The Soviet Mars 2 becomes the first probe to reach the surface of Mars.

On April 14, 1961, two days after Gagarin’s historic flight, a panicked President Kennedy reportedly inquired of NASA what goal in space America might be able to attain before the Soviets. According to legend, President Kennedy was told that America’s best hope to beat the Russians was with a manned Moon landing. At Rice University on September 12th, 1962 President Kennedy made the following speech setting the goal of the Moon landings by the end of the 1960s:

4. NASA Has Lost All Data, Blueprints And Records From The Apollo Missions:

Following Freedom Of Information requests in America NASA admitted it had lost all their original video footage of the Apollo Missions. Unfortunately, it isn’t just the video footage that is missing. Also allegedly beamed back from the Moon was voice data, biomedical monitoring data, and telemetry data to monitor the location and mechanical functioning of the spaceship. All of that data, the entire alleged record of the Moon landings, was on the 13,000+ reels that are said to be ‘missing.’ Also missing, according to NASA and its various subcontractors, are the original plans/blueprints for the lunar modules. And for the spacesuits and lunar rovers. And for the entire multi-sectioned Saturn V rockets.

NASA have lost all records of the Apollo Missions - that's 700 cartons altogether.

NASA have lost all records of the Apollo Missions – that’s 700 cartons altogether.

5. The Apollo A7L Space Suits Used In The Apollo Missions:

The Space Suits used in the Apollo Missions were the A7L design.International Latex Corporation, which was best known as the manufacturer of Playtex bras and girdles, was awarded the contract. Hamilton Standard was awarded the contract to design and build the life-support packs known as PLSS units. All designs and blueprints for the A7L space suits have been lost.

NASA's officially released photograph of the Apollo Missions Space Suit.

NASA’s officially released photograph of the Apollo Missions Space Suit A7L.

Conditions on the Moon are very different to Earth as there is no atmosphere. The temperature in sunlight is estimated by NASA to be 107 degrees Celsius (225 degrees Fahrenheit) and in the shade is minus 153 degrees Celsius (minus 243 degrees Fahrenheit). There is also a constant bombardment of meteoroids.“Meteoroids,” NASA states, “are nearly-microscopic specks of space dust that fly through space at speeds often exceeding 50,000 mph – ten times faster than a speeding bullet. They pack a considerable punch … The tiny space bullets can plow directly into Moon rocks, forming miniature and unmistakable craters.” There is also the problem of massive space radiation on the Moon as there is no atmosphere like on Earth to protect it.

NASA diagram of the shield it believes will be required to protect astronauts in future Moon landings from radiation and meteoroids. They didn't bother with this in the 1960s.

NASA diagram of the shield it believes will be required to protect astronauts in future Moon landings from radiation and meteoroids. NASA didn’t bother with this in the 1960s and 1970s.

NASA has now stated that maintaining 100% clean-room conditions on space exploration vehicles while performing EVAs on planetary bodies is essential as even the smallest amount of dust could cripple any space ship. Their solution for future Moon landings is the “rear-entry spacesuit” which is attached to the outside of a lunar module and is climbed in to before detaching from the lunar module. The procedure is reversed to get back in the lunar module.

NASA diagram of the rear-entry spacesuit it has designed for future Moon landings.

NASA diagram of the rear-entry spacesuit it has designed for future Moon landings. In the 1960s and 1970s NASA didn’t worry about details like clean-room conditions.

The A7L must have been a remarkable spacesuit, it was radiation proof, able to withstand 50,000 MPH meteoroids and able to switch between 107 degrees Celsius (225 degrees Fahrenheit) and minus 153 degrees Celsius (minus 243 degrees Fahrenheit) in an instant. The A7L also had a full life-support system, oxygen and human waste management. Unfortunately we can not inspect, or even recreate, these spacesuits as NASA claims it has lost all the designs and blueprints. NASA claims the spacesuits themselves were left on the Moon to save weight on the return journey.

6. The Van Allen Radiation Belts:

The Van Allen radiation belts are two regions of radiation that encircle the Earth. They are named in honor of James Van Allen, the scientist who led the team that launched the first successful satellite that could detect radioactive particles in space. This was Explorer 1, which launched in 1958 and led to the discovery of the radiation belts. There is a large outer belt that follows the magnetic field lines essentially from the north to south poles around the planet. This belt begins around 8,400 to 36,000 miles above the surface of the Earth. The inner belt does not extend as far north and south. It runs, on average, from 60 miles about the Earth’s surface to about 6,000 miles. The two belts expand and shrink. Sometimes the outer belt nearly disappears. Sometimes it swells so much that the two belts appear to merge to form one big radiation belt.In 1969-70 the Van Allen Belt was at it’s 11 year cycle peak radiation


Due to the Van Allen radiation belts no manned space craft has ever travelled more than 400 miles above the Earth’s surface, apart from the Apollo missions. On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there’s a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.” The Russians have calculated that to protect their cosmonauts from radiation a 4 foot (120cm) thick lead casing would be needed.

7. Shadows On Moon Photographs:

According to NASA the Apollo Moon missions carried no lighting equipment, and the only light source for Apollo photographs and videos was the sun. Despite this there seems to be at least two light sources on a number of Apollo photographs due to there being shadows cast in two directions.Here is an example of these two light source photographs:


In other photographs it appears the light source is much closer than the Sun would be:


8. The Lunar Explorer Modules:

The Lunar Explorer Modules (LEM) were the part of the Apollo missions that detached from the Command Service Modules (CSM)and descended to the Moon’s surface. The LEMs were all designed and built by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation of New York. Even though no designs or blueprints still exist for LEMs or CSMs here is a NASA diagram of a LEM:


The LEMs had an exterior measurement of about 12 foot by 12 foot (360cmX360cm) according to NASA, with a crew compartment of about 6 foot by 6 foot by 6 foot (180cmX180cmX180cm). Due to lower gravity on the Moon it had an effective weight of about 3 tons on the Lunar surface. For the descent stage, there is the reverse-thrust rocket that allegedly allowed the craft to make a soft landing on the Moon. And then for the ascent stage a powerful rocket propels the top half of the LEM into lunar orbit. The LEM would then dock with the CSM that NASA state was orbiting the Moon at about 4,000 MPH.

Photograph of a LEM on the Lunar surface released by NASA.

Photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Lunar surface released by NASA.

NASA claimed there was no room for seats in the LEMs, but never indicated where the astronauts slept during their time on the Moon’s surface.

Close up of photograph serial number AS11-40-5922 released by NASA.

Close up of photograph serial number AS11-40-5922 released by NASA.

9. The Lunar Roving Vehicle:

The Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) or Lunar Rover was a battery-powered four-wheeled rover used on the Moon in the last three missions of the American Apollo Missions ( 15,16 and 17) during 1971 and 1972. It was popularly known as the Moon Buggy.It was a fragile looking, open-space vehicle about 10 feet long with large mesh wheels, antenna appendages, tool caddies and cameras. Powered by two 36-volt batteries, it had four one-fourth hp drive motors, one for each wheel.The LRV was transported to the Moon on the Lunar Explorer Modules (LEMs) and, once unpacked on the surface, could carry one or two astronauts, their equipment, and lunar samples. According to NASA the three LRVs remain on the Moon.

LRV from Apollo 15 mission allegedly photographed on the Moon in 1971.

LRV from Apollo 15 mission allegedly photographed on the Moon in 1971. Notice there are boot prints but no tyre tracks – did the LRV float in to this position? NASA photo serial number As15-88-11901

The first cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to Boeing was for $19,000,000 ( about $150,000,000 in 2013 US Dollars) and called for delivery of the first LRV by 1 April 1971. Cost overruns, however, led to a final cost of $38,000,000, ( about $300,000,000 in 2013 US Dollars)which was about the same as NASA’s original estimate. When questioned how the LRVs could fit in the LEMs NASA claimed that they folded in to the size of a suitcase.

Apart from the mystery tyre tracks NASA must use some big suitcases.

The LRV could only be being unpacked in this photograph as NASA didn’t re-pack any LRVs as they were all allegedly left on the Moon. Apart from the mystery tyre tracks NASA must use some big suitcases.

NASA are planning a manned trip to the Moon in the 2020s or 2030s. They have released photographs of their prototype Lunar Rovers which will be radiation and meteoroid proof.

NASA prototype Lunar Rover for future manned moon trips. Not as cool as the 1970s version but much safer from radiation and meteoroids.

NASA prototype Lunar Rover for future manned Moon trips. Not as cool as the 1960s/1970s version but much safer from radiation and meteoroids.

Here is a video of the Lunar Rover on the alleged Apollo 16 mission:

Here is another good Lunar Rover video:

10.The Lunar Explorer Module Landing Sites:

The Lunar Explorer Modules (LEM) were the part of the Apollo missions that detached from the Command Service Modules (CSM)and descended to the Moon’s surface. Due to lower gravity on the Moon it had an effective weight of about 3 tons on the Lunar surface. For the descent stage, there is the reverse-thrust rocket that allegedly allowed the craft to make a soft landing on the Moon.

NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon's surface. As can be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse thrust rockets which were allegedly used.

NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon’s surface. As can be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse-thrust rockets which were allegedly used.

The reverse-thrust rocket system would have created a crater under the LEM landing site, and would probably have turned the dust in to a glass-like substance. In the photograph below you can’t see so much as a single grain of ‘lunar soil’ settled onto the lunar modules while they were setting down.

Another NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon's surface. It can again be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse-thrust rockets which were allegedly used.

Another NASA photograph of a LEM allegedly on the Moon’s surface. It can again be clearly seen no dust has been displaced by the reverse-thrust rockets which were allegedly used.

11. Evidence Of Studio Lighting On Apollo Mission Photographs:

NASA has repeatedly stated that there was no artificial lighting used on the Apollo Moon landings and the only light source for videos and photographs is the Sun. However a careful study of numerous Apollo photographs would seem to indicate the use of studio lighting suggesting the “landings” were filmed and photographed in a film studio.

In one shot (AS14-64-9089) studio-lighting representing the sun is seen reflecting off a black background, a photographic effect that couldn’t happen in the blackness of space, and could only reflect off a background

In one shot (AS14-64-9089) studio-lighting representing the sun is seen reflecting off a black background, a photographic effect that couldn’t happen in the blackness of space, and could only reflect off a background

In this Apollo 12 photograph there appears to be the reflection of what can only be an overhead studio light.

In this Apollo 12 photograph there appears to be the reflection of what can only be an overhead studio light.

This Apollo 12 photograph (AS12-49-7278) shows two lens flares from overhead lighting.

This Apollo 12 photograph (AS12-49-7278) shows two lens flares from overhead lighting.

The angles of the shadows in this Apollo 14 photograph (AS14-68-9486) indicate a light source just to the left of the photograph. This can't be the Sun and can only be an artificial light.

The angles of the shadows in this Apollo 14 photograph (AS14-68-9486) indicate a light source just to the left of the photograph. This can’t be the Sun and can only be an artificial light.

12. The Fake Moon Rocks:

On their return from the alleged Apollo 11 Moon landing Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins toured together giving “Moon rocks” to grateful countries around the World. Altogether NASA gave over 100 countries “Moon rocks”

A "moon rock" that turned out to be petrified wood when tested by scientists. How radioactive would a real rock from the Moon be?

A “Moon rock” that turned out to be petrified wood when tested by scientists. How radioactive would a real rock from the Moon be?

Whenever they have been tested these alleged “Moon rocks” have turned out to be fakes. Here is an article from the British mainstream media about a fake “Moon rock” :

One other point is that surely a genuine rock brought from the surface of the Moon would have been highly radioactive, and far too dangerous for public display.

13.Laser Reflectors Left On The Moon:

One piece of evidence NASA repeatedly quote is that they left laser reflectors on the Moon which are still there. NASA claim that they can prove the laser reflectors are on the Moon because they can bounce lasers off them to measure the distance from the Earth to the Moon.

Laser reflector that NASA claims it left on the Moon.

Laser reflector that NASA claims it left on the Moon.

 According to NASA the fact that observatories to this day bounce lasers off the alleged reflectors proves that the Apollo missions succeeded. It is perfectly obvious though that the targets, if there, could have been placed robotically – most likely by the Soviets. It is also possible that there are no laser targets on the Moon. In December 1966, National Geographic reported that scientists at MIT had been achieving essentially the same result for four years by bouncing a laser off the surface of the Moon. The New York Times added that the Soviets had been doing the same thing since at least 1963, possibly as early as 1962 or even 1961.

You might have used one of the laser room measurers that most hardware / DIY shops carry nowadays. They manage to measure the size of rooms by bouncing a laser off opposite walls without any laser reflector.

14.Onboard Computer System:

NASA claim that the onboard computer for the Apollo Missions had a memory capacity of about 72 kilobytes – that is less powerful than most modern digital watches. NASA have never clarified whether this computer was on the Command Service Module (orbiting the Moon at 4,000 miles per hour) or either part of the two-part Lunar Exploration Module. Therefore either the CSM or the LEM had no onboard computer.

1960s computers were total crap.

1960s computers were total crap. Maybe that’s why NASA only shared one between the CSM and LEM.

The most complicated aspect of the Apollo missions was the landing of the lunar modules, which made the software program controlling that part of the mission the most difficult to design. Amazingly though, that aspect of the software design was not assigned until after most of the other programmes were 2/3 complete – and it was assigned to a twenty-two-year-old gent named Don Isles who had just recently started his very first job. According to Moon Machines, “the programme without which it would be impossible to land on the Moon … had been written almost as an afterthought by a junior engineer.”

15. Mission Control In Houston Texas:

All the Apollo  missions were allegedly controlled by Mission Control at the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas.

Mission Control in Huston, Texas looked very impressive. However it was totally fake.

Mission Control in Houston, Texas looked very impressive. However it was totally fake.

Mission Control looked like the cutting edge of 1960s technology at the time. However it has now been revealed that the staff were simply store clerks hired to pretend to be NASA scientists. A 2005 documentary entitled First on the Moon: The Untold Story, showed that Mission Control at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas “was not as high-tech as it looked.” In reality, as Apollo 11 computer engineer Jack Garman tells us, “the computer screens that we looked at in Mission Control weren’t computer screens at all. They were televisions. All the letters, or characters, [they] were all hand drawn. I don’t necessarily mean with a brush, but I mean they were painted on a slide.” Jack Garman was allegedly the member of the Apollo 11 ground-crew who cleared the Eagle to land despite the fact that multiple alarms were going off.

16. NASA Claims Photos Proved The Moon Landings Happened:

  NASA launched the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) on June 18th 2009 to photograph and map the Moon to find safe landing sites for Moon landings. NASA claims to have taken photographs of the Apollo 11 landing site and the bottom half of the LEM which didn’t return. Here are the photos that allegedly prove the Apollo missions to the Moon took place.

I can't see anything from 500 meters up - maybe if we got closer.

I can’t see anything from 500 metres up – maybe if we got closer.

 As you can see from 500 metres above the Moon there is no visible sign of the bottom half of the LEM from the Apollo 11 mission.

NASA claim that these photos from 200 metres up clearly show the Apollo 11 landing site and the bottom half of the LEM.

NASA claim that these photos from 200 metres up clearly show the Apollo 11 landing site and the bottom half of the LEM.

17. Lack Of Stars:

One argument for the Apollo Moon landings being hoaxed is the total lack of stars in any of the photographic/video evidence. There are no clouds on the Moon, so stars are perpetually visible and significantly brighter than what we see through the filter of Earth’s atmosphere.


 Did NASA realise it impossible to map out the exact locations of all the stars for the hoax without being rumbled, and therefore left them out? Intentionally falling back on an excuse that the quality of the photographs washes them out (an excuse they did actually give).

Some photographs are high-quality, however, and yet still no stars are shown. Certainly eerie, considering you can take pictures of stars from Earth in much lower quality and still see them.

Here is a video of Patrick Moore asking the Apollo 11 astronauts whether they could see stars from the Moon:

18. Faked Moon Walks:

 Over the years there have been some serious questions raised about the film of Astronauts allegedly walking on the Moon. NASA claims the original Apollo footage has been lost but copies of it recorded by TV stations at the time are still available. One of the main criticisms is that with one sixth gravity the Astronauts don’t seem to be able to jump very high and when speeded up their jumps seem very Earthly. Also if you look how the dust is thrown up it also seems very similar to Earth which it obviously shouldn’t be.

Here is one video out of many showing these flaws in the footage:

19. Stanley Kubrick And Front Screen Projection:

Stanley Kubrick (July 26, 1928 – March 7, 1999) was a jewish American film director, screenwriter, producer, cinematographer and editor who did much of his work in the United Kingdom. Stanley Kubrick is regarded as one of the greatest and most influential directors of all time. His films are noted for their unique cinematography, attention to detail in the service of realism, and the evocative use of music.

Stanley Kubrick in 1971.

Stanley Kubrick in 1971.

What is Front Screen Projection?

Kubrick did not invent the process but there is no doubt that he perfected it.Front Screen Projection is a cinematic device that allows scenes to be projected behind the actors so that it appears, in the camera, as if the actors are moving around on the set provided by the Front Screen Projection.The process came into fruition when the 3M company invented a material called Scotchlite. This was a screen material that was made up of hundreds of thousands of tiny glass beads each about .4 millimeters wide. These beads were highly reflective. In the Front Screen Projection process the Scotchlite screen would be placed at the back of the soundstage. The plane of the camera lens and the Scotchlite screen had to be exactly 90 degrees apart. A projector would project the scene onto the Scotchlite screen through a mirror and the light would go through a beam splitter, which would pass the light into the camera. An actor would stand in front of the Scotchlite screen, and he would appear to be “inside” the projection.

How "Front Screen Projection" works.

How “Front Screen Projection” works.

In Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey Kubrick uses “Front Screen Projection” in several scenes.

Scene from Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) using the "Front Screen Projection" technique.

Scene from Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) using the “Front Screen Projection” technique.

The same scene with a line showing the set and the background Scotchlite Front Projection Screen.

The same scene with a line showing the set and the background Scotchlite Front Projection Screen.

In the example above of “Front Screen Projection” the part under the line is a stage set and the part above is a screen. Looking at the Apollo Mission photos below the same technique seems to have been used.

A still photograph from the Apollo 17 Mission.

A still photograph from the Apollo 17 Mission.

The same photo from Apollo 17 with a line showing the back of the set.

The same photo from Apollo 17 with a line showing where the back of the set looks to be.

Another photo from Apollo Mission 17.

Another photo from Apollo Mission 17.

The same photo from Apollo Mission 17 with a line indicating where the set ends and the Scotchlite Front Projection Screen begins.

The same photo from Apollo Mission 17 with a line indicating where the set seems to end and the Scotchlite Front Projection Screen begins.

 Here is an extensive study of Apollo imagery by photo analyst Jack White BA:

20. Return Trips To The Moon:

In 2005 NASA started their  Constellation Programme (abbreviated CxP) to put men back on the Moon. They originally planned to get a man on the Moon by 2028 ( over three times longer than in the 1960s ) but soon pushed that date back to 2035.


On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there’s a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.” The Russians have calculated that to protect their cosmonauts from radiation a 4 foot (120cm) thick lead casing would be needed.

In 2010 the Constellation Programme was put on the back-burner, due to insurmountable technical problems, after around $50 billion had been spent on it. NASA could have obviously used the 1960s Apollo designs if they hadn’t all been lost.

If NASA Did Fake The Moon Landings: Why? Where? How? Who?

Why?  If NASA did fake the Moon landings the obvious reason is that after John F Kennedy stated that America would put a man on the Moon before the end of the 1960s America couldn’t really back down. They would probably not have realised before about 1963 that it was impossible, and by then they had gone through 10s of billions of Dollars of taxpayers money. The loss of prestige, both at home and abroad, could have even brought down the American military/industrial complex and the American elite.

Where? If NASA did fake the Moon landings then the fake footage could have been shot at many locations, and probably more than one. NASA had its own recreations of the Moon surface and such places as Area 51, Lauren Canyon in Hollywood or even the set of Space Odyssey: 2001 could all have easily been used.

How? Faking the Moon landings would have been a lot easier than actually making the Moon landings. Everything the public saw on Earth would have been real apart from the Astronauts would have left the Saturn V rocket secretly before take off. The empty Saturn V rocket would have blasted off empty and fallen back to Earth, while NASA reported that the CSM and LEM were on their way to the Moon. After that all NASA had to do was bounce the fake transmissions off the Moon back to Earth. For the return “splashdown” they could have simply dropped the CSM from a helicopter or transport plane.

Who? The favourite suggestion for who directed the Apollo footage, if it was fake, is obviously Stanley Kubrick who made several references to the Apollo Missions in his other films. Another intriguing possibility is that director Roman Polanski was either involved or knew too much and a lot of his troubles, including the murder of Sharon Tate, are linked to the Apollo Missions.